Maps when?

13»

Comments

  • SirBobdk
    3928 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
     Getting upset that there's an option for chocolate ice cream even though they don't want it simply because "all those resources could have been used on making more vanilla."
    .
    It doesn't matter that I can choose chocolate if i like vanilla and they have spoiled the taste so it no longer tastes like vanilla.
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:
     Getting upset that there's an option for chocolate ice cream even though they don't want it simply because "all those resources could have been used on making more vanilla."
    .
    It doesn't matter that I can choose chocolate if i like vanilla and they have spoiled the taste so it no longer tastes like vanilla.
    This conversation was about firestorm. Not really sure how something completely different can ruin the base game. But sure.
  • EoG_Alchemist
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    EoG_Alchemist said:


    aRrAyStArTaT0 wrote: »
    Stahlmach said:



    aRrAyStArTaT0 said:





    Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V.







    I mean, is it not? Just because you don't like Battle Royal titles doesn't mean they don't exist and work didn't go into them right? Just because you don't like racing games or fighting games doesn't mean they don't exist. It's a ridiculous assumption to pull the "But I don't play BR so that's not relevant to me" as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don't play with shotguns doesn't mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn't mean it's not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. "Nobody asked for" is a blanket statement. I'm sure atleast one person has asked for it. I've even seen it on the forums. There's a reason Squad Conquest was so popular.





    Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps.





    I'm not dodging the important part. You're ignoring my point though. The work is there. It's a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it's even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don't like BR games.

    .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type.



    Just because there is work does not mean it is good work.



    If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house.

    But you didn't pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn't you??? It's outrageous to claim you didn't get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more.

    But I did. We all did. We were told that DLC would be free. Our previous experience of DLC was all we had to go on for this series. We were also led to believe that the microtransactions would fund it. I paid the $60 for what I was told was gonna happen with this game and I do not see it anywhere in the plan.

    I would have never bought this game knowing it's lack of maps would last this long.
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    EoG_Alchemist said:


    aRrAyStArTaT0 wrote: »
    Stahlmach said:



    aRrAyStArTaT0 said:





    Thats like saying that the Singleplayercampaigns count because they have " maps " and " work went into these ". Firestorm was created by Criterion and not Dice. So what are they actually doing all the time ?Oh i know they announced one Map for march but that was delayed a week before the release towards May and nobody knows if that one map will now even be released in May. The next thing are Cod like 5 vs 5 Maps nobody asked for.Former Battlefield titles had shortly after release more maps on the main part of Battlefield which is Conquest. While these maps were far better than the joke maps of BF V.







    I mean, is it not? Just because you don't like Battle Royal titles doesn't mean they don't exist and work didn't go into them right? Just because you don't like racing games or fighting games doesn't mean they don't exist. It's a ridiculous assumption to pull the "But I don't play BR so that's not relevant to me" as it can be applied to literally anything, even in the same game. Just because you don't play with shotguns doesn't mean the new shotgun they (might) come out with doesn't mean it's not content..Also, be careful with absolutes. "Nobody asked for" is a blanket statement. I'm sure atleast one person has asked for it. I've even seen it on the forums. There's a reason Squad Conquest was so popular.





    Dont dodge the important part. Unlike Guns or Vehicles a Battle Royal mode is actually a total different Game. Its like putting a race mode with Tanks into BF V. And again, it wasnt even Dice who made Firestorm but Criterion. So although it was outsourced the Dice Devs did what excactly the entire time regarding to Maps ?The former titles had maps that were made mainly for Conquest and had the possibility to be used for Squad Conquest while in the case of BF 3 there was later a mappack like Close Quarters. But before that came things like Armored Kills with big Maps and lots Vehicles. And here we have BF V, a Battlefield Game set in WW2, the biggest War in human history and we have maps like Rotterdam and Fjell while you barely see vehicles, especially Tanks.While the rest is also a joke compared to the quality of former BF titles maps.





    I'm not dodging the important part. You're ignoring my point though. The work is there. It's a game mode, clearly, rather than a game, just like Blackout is a game mode in BO4. It fits and fills a niche. Lots of people enjoy the mode as well. SO many people enjoy the mode. I have yet to see one bad review about how the gameplay feels, acts, or plays out from anyone except the forums who are upset that it's even Battle Royal. I have fun playing it and I don't like BR games.

    .Edit: Obligatory; it has flaws of course, but as far as quality is far more popular than many games and game modes (Blackout, for instance) of the same or similar type.



    Just because there is work does not mean it is good work.



    If I pay you to build a house and instead you build me a shed, the work is there but I wanted a damn house.

    But you didn't pay for anything except the game. And as far as I can tell, you still got the game didn't you??? It's outrageous to claim you didn't get what you wanted because they built what you paid for and more.

    But I did. We all did. We were told that DLC would be free. Our previous experience of DLC was all we had to go on for this series. We were also led to believe that the microtransactions would fund it. I paid the $60 for what I was told was gonna happen with this game and I do not see it anywhere in the plan.

    I would have never bought this game knowing it's lack of maps would last this long.
    And the DLC ... isn't free? I don't know what you're supposed to get from that. The DLC is free. Where in the world did you see that there's going to be X maps by X date? Roadmaps are approximate, and thus far, roadmaps have been pretty accurate.
Sign In or Register to comment.